On 30/05/17(Tue) 13:59, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> This is a step I need to do to make progress on the PF_KEY cleanup I'm
> doing. Both PF_ROUTE and PF_KEY need to start to take care of their own
> PCB list and so move the LIST_ENTRY out of rawcb into routecb.
> This allows me to do the same in PF_KEY which will be sent as the next
> diff.
>
> --
> :wq Claudio
>
> Index: net/rtsock.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/net/rtsock.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.237
> diff -u -p -r1.237 rtsock.c
> --- net/rtsock.c 19 Apr 2017 15:21:54 -0000 1.237
> +++ net/rtsock.c 30 May 2017 10:29:25 -0000
> @@ -154,45 +157,50 @@ struct route_cb route_cb;
>
> #define ROUTE_DESYNC_RESEND_TIMEOUT (hz / 5) /* In hz */
>
> +void
> +route_prinit(void)
> +{
> + LIST_INIT(&route_cb.rcb);
> +}
> +
> +
> int
> route_usrreq(struct socket *so, int req, struct mbuf *m, struct mbuf *nam,
> struct mbuf *control, struct proc *p)
> {
> - struct rawcb *rp;
> struct routecb *rop;
> int af;
> int error = 0;
>
> - rp = sotorawcb(so);
> + rop = sotoroutecb(so);
> + if (rop == NULL)
> + return ENOTCONN;
Previously raw_usrreq() was returning EINVAL in that case. Does it
matter?
You should also call m_freem(m), because even if PRU_RCVD and PRU_DETACH
do not take any argument, we cannot be sure all other code paths cannot
be reached. That's one of the reasons I'm suggesting we split the PRU
switches in multiple functions.
> @@ -240,10 +248,11 @@ route_attach(struct socket *so, int prot
> #endif
> rp->rcb_faddr = &route_src;
> route_cb.any_count++;
> + LIST_INSERT_HEAD(&route_cb.rcb, rop, rcb_list);
> soisconnected(so);
> so->so_options |= SO_USELOOPBACK;
I'd do the insertion last. It doesn't matter if all operations are
serialized but it doesn't cost anything and who knows what's coming
next ;)
Other than that I like this diff very much.
